You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Douglas_Knight comments on Open Thread for February 11 - 17 - Less Wrong Discussion

3 Post author: Coscott 11 February 2014 06:08PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (325)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Douglas_Knight 12 February 2014 07:54:07PM 0 points [-]

What do you mean by "theoretical"? Is this just an insult you fling at people you disagree with?

Comment author: Creutzer 12 February 2014 11:17:09PM 0 points [-]

Huh? What a curious misunderstanding! The theoretical referred just the - theoretical! - question of whether it's in principle possible to acquire native-like proficiency, which was contrasted with my claim that even if it is, most people cannot expect to reach that state in practice.

Comment author: Douglas_Knight 13 February 2014 01:47:18AM 0 points [-]

I thought that my choice of the word "commonly" indicated that I was not talking about the limits of the possible.

Comment author: Creutzer 13 February 2014 03:11:28AM *  1 point [-]

You really think it's common for L2 speakers to achieve native-like levels of proficiency? Where do you live and who are these geniuses? I'm serious. For example, I see people speaking at conferences who have lived in the US for years, but aren't native speakers, and they are still not doing so with native-like fluency and eloquence. And presumably you have to be more than averagely intelligent to give a talk at a scientific conference...

I'm not talking about just any kind of fluency here, and neither was fubarobfusco, I assume. I suspect I was trying to interpret your utterance in a way that I didn't assign very low probability to (i.e. not as claiming that it's common for people to become native-like) and that also wasn't a non-sequitur wrt the claim you were referring to (by reducing native-like fluency to some weaker notion) and kind of failed.

Comment author: Douglas_Knight 13 February 2014 04:57:58AM 0 points [-]

Maybe I should have said "routinely" rather than "commonly." But the key differentiator is effort.

I don't care about your theoretical question of whether you can come up with a test that L2 speakers fail. I assume that fubarobfusco meant the same thing I meant. I'm done.